Wednesday, December 11, 2024

The UK government shouldn’t pin all of its hopes for economic growth on the finance industry
9 December, 2024
Left Foot Forward 

Such a strategy was tried in 1970s and came to grief in the mid-1970s secondary banking crash.



The UK government has pinned its hopes of economic rejuvenation on the growth of the finance industry. Such a strategy was tried in 1970s and came to grief in the mid-1970s secondary banking crash. It deepened economic crises and paved the way for the rise of neoliberalism. The government tried the same in 1980s and it eventually delivered the 2007-08 banking crash. The government provided £1,162bn of cash and guarantees to bail out the banking industry, and £895bn of quantitative easing to support capital markets. The government, besotted with the finance industry, is returning to the failed strategy of further financialisation of everyday life through outsourcing, private finance initiatives (PFI) and creeping privatisation of the National Health Service.

Finance is central to the workings of a capitalist economy. We all make use of banks, debit/credit cards, insurances, pensions; foreign exchange and a variety of financial services, but can do without the incessant speculation and frauds that are so common in the finance industry. Is finance really the “crown jewel in our economy”, as the Chancellor claims? In 2023, it contributed £208.2bn to the UK economy, 8.8% of total economic output, and 1.17m jobs. The slick City PR machine never tires of exaggerating its importance. It claims that some 2.4m jobs across the UK are in finance. But only 678,000 work directly in the City of London. It claims that 1.1m work in the finance industry and anther 1.4m work in related professional services. The point to note is that majority of accountants, lawyers, actuaries, IT experts are spread out across the economy and do not mainly work in the finance industry.

The finance industry claims that in 2023 it paid £110.2bn in taxes. This is extrapolated from a survey of 82 finance firms. The scare quotes around the findings are that “PwC has aggregated and anonymised data from professional and financial firms to produce study results, which have not been verified or audited for accuracy”. So the industry’s tax contribution cannot be independently corroborated.

The headline tax amounts are not what they claim to be. The alleged £110.2bn tax contribution includes £61.8bn of taxes collected from others. For example, £40.1bn of income tax and national insurance is collected from employees and borne by employees, not the industry; £4.7bn is tax deducted at source i.e. borne by investors and £17bn VAT is borne by customers. That leaves £48.3bn tax borne by the finance industry, including only £14.2bn corporation tax, and £3.9bn of bank levy and surcharge.

Too many politicians are mesmerised by the vast amounts spent on clever bets in the world’s financial markets. One commentator noted that the world GDP is around $105 trillion but the “value of the financial derivatives which arise from this activity – that’s the subsequent trading – is $667 trillion …in terms of the things it produces, that business is useless. It does nothing and adds no value”.

Vast amounts of money are wagered on the price of shares, bonds, derivatives, food and commodities. Money is simply transferred from A to B, and is not invested in productive assets. This organised gambling produces no benefit to society in aggregate, “because every gain is matched by an identical loss. It all sums to zero”. The punters play with other people’s money but collect vast salaries and bonuses.

The scandal-ridden finance industry is bloated. In 1970, its assets were worth about 50% of UK GDP but by 2022 its assets hit £27 trillion, compared to GDP of £2.5 trillion. A large part of this are complex gambles, a bit like someone placing bets on horses and treating betting slips as an asset. When the race is run the betting slips either result in gains or become worthless. This is the reality of gambles on derivatives and complex financial instruments. The industry’s size has no relationship with any economic activity and it is parasitical on the real economy. .

Neither the government nor the City acknowledges the havoc caused by the finance industry’s speculation and its role in depriving skilled labour to more productive economic sectors. Research shows that between 1995 and 2015 the finance industry made a negative contribution of £4,500bn to the UK economy, which effectively wiped off two-year’s gross domestic product. Of this loss around “£2,700 billion is accounted for by the misallocation of resources where resources, skills and investments are diverted away from more productive non-financial activities into finance. The other £1,800 billion arises from the 2008 banking crisis”. Endless scandals since 2015, such as dud financial products, pension scams, London Capital and Finance, Woodford Equity Income Fund, Connaught Income Fund and others have reduced the contribution of the finance industry to the economic wellbeing of the country.

Almost all UK banks have been involved in mis-selling financial products, tax dodges, sanctions busting and illicit financial flows. Successive governments indulge them. The Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) was the biggest banking fraud of the twentieth century, and was closed by regulators in 1991. To date, there has bene no investigation. In 2012, HSBC admitted “criminal conduct” and was fined a record $1.9bn by the US authorities. No action was taken in the UK. Instead, the then Chancellor George Osborne secretly wrote to the US authorities and urged them not to prosecute HSBC as the bank was somehow too big to fail. Inevitably, the City is magnet for illicit financial flows. A UK Minister stated that around 40% of the dirty money in the world is going through the City of London and other crown dependencies.

The UK has one of the world’s largest finance industries, and at the same time businesses are starved of capital for investment in productive assets. The City is hollowing out the economy. In 2023, only £18.8bn in total was raised on the London Stock Exchange. The share buybacks were £46.9bn for the same period. As a Bank of England economist put it “among UK companies, share buybacks have consistently exceeded share issuance over the past decade … In other words, over the past decade the equity market no longer appears to have been a source of net new financing to the UK corporate sector”.

Raising money from capital markets brings its own challenges as finance degenerated into a rent-seeking activity. The City expects higher dividends. In 1970, major UK companies paid out about £10 of each £100 of profits in dividends, but by 2015 the amount was between £60 and £70, and rising. The Bank of England noted that “80% of publicly listed businesses that underinvested answered yes when asked if financial market pressures for short-term returns were an obstacle to investment. 40% of privately owned businesses also answered yes”. The lust for short-term returns is accompanied by a squeeze on labour and investment.

Inevitably, the UK has been bottom of the G7 league for investment in productive assets in 24 out of last 30 years. It ranks 28th among 31 OECD countries. This is despite the state-backed Private Finance Initiative (PFI) programme, which ran from 1992 to 2018 and guaranteed corporate profits. The finance industry invested £60bn in schools, prisons, hospitals, roads, street lighting and military equipment with agreement to receive repayments of over £306bn.

The stark truth is that the City does not have the appetite for long-term planning, investment and risks. As a result the UK economy is becoming more insecure. It imports roughly 40% of its food and 40.8% of energy needs. The government wants to build 1.5m new homes, but the UK lacks building materials. The UK is the world’s largest importer of bricks and imported over 500m bricks in 2022, and 30%-40% of its cement. Rather than building industrial capacity, the finance industry is focused on cash extraction.

Successive UK governments have failed to empower regulators or clean-up the City. There have been no effective corporate governance or regulatory reforms. Almost every law has been bent to support the City and it has delivered little of value in return. Instead of relying upon the City the government could create its own bank to direct and support investment in emerging industries and technologies, but such interventions are not on the political agenda. Governments can back more productive industries, but rarely do. For example, the manufacturing sector accounts for around £518bn; 23% of GDP; and 7.3m jobs. Every £1m of manufacturing activity supports a further £1.8m through indirect and induced multiplier effects. But the government backs the finance industry, which continues to find novel ways of gambling and enriching a few. The normal rules of capitalism are suspended as failed banks are always bailed out. This fuels more gambling and predatory practices. The casino economy is unlikely to deliver prosperity or happiness to the masses.

Prem Sikka is an Emeritus Professor of Accounting at the University of Essex and the University of Sheffield, a Labour member of the House of Lords, and Contributing Editor at Left Foot Forward.

UK

We need a fairer UNISON, one that puts members first – Andrea Egan


“I will continue to be fearless in speaking up for oppressed people around the globe, including calling for an arms embargo on Israel whilst working with our international trade union allies to share advice and best practise.”

Andrea Egan, Candidate for UNISON General Secretary

With over 1.3 million members and an income of £200m, I am proud to be a part of Britain’s largest trade union. However, I have been left disappointed in UNISON’s current General Secretary and her allies’ failure to exert the union’s influence to improve the lives and conditions for our members. For far too long, UNISON’s bureaucracy has been sluggish in implementing democratic decisions chosen by our members, which has resulted in a membership left disillusioned by top-down decision-making, bureaucratic inefficiency and waste. This has to change. 

In 2022 I was proud to be elected President of the union. During my year-long tenure, I supported the implementation of UNISON’s first Race Discrimination Panel, gave support to the launch of trans ally training and championed the UNISON’s disabled workers passport. I led on the Organising to Win programme which has done so much to support members to secure substantial improvements to pay and conditions. However I was prevented from doing more by a minority in our union who didn’t want change. 

That’s why I’m standing to be UNISON’s General Secretary to bring about a transformation of our union, ensuring branches and members have the power to secure crucial wins within the workplace. If elected, I will conduct a review into the union’s machinery to ensure our policies are not just words on a piece of paper, but are fully implemented. To make sure that I remain true to my principles and close to our members, I will only take the salary of a social worker and channel the rest of the £166,000 pay packet into industrial action and welfare funds. I believe actions speak louder than words.

Furthermore, there should be zero tolerance for any forms of discrimination in UNISON. A commitment to anti-racism, trans allyship and celebrating diversity is essential to a thriving organisation. So within my first 100 days of being elected, I will convene a meeting with all self-identifying groups within the union to listen and adhere to their demands for a truly inclusive environment

What’s more, I will continue to be fearless in speaking up for oppressed people around the globe, including calling for an arms embargo on Israel whilst working with our international trade union allies to share advice and best practise. 

I started working life as a low-paid children’s care worker and later became a social worker. It’s with this first-hand experience that I take pride in vociferously campaigning on the issues affecting our members. This includes attending demonstrations, lobbies and picket lines, defending our public services from austerity, coordinating anti-racist events and leading the union’s first industrial action against the academisation of secondary schools in 2008. I have fought for social justice my entire life and now I want to use my experience to transform the entire way our union works. 

I believe that everyone has a right to a wage they can live on, a house they can live in, a health service that can look after them, education for their children and the ability to retire with dignity. I will fight for these objectives. If you are a UNISON member and want to fight for them too, it would be fantastic to have your support.


  • You can support Andrea Egan’s campaign for UNISON General Secretary here. Her campaign is supported by Time for Real Change, rank and file UNISON activists determined to make UNISON democratic, transparent and successful. 
  • You can follow Andrea’s campaign for UNISON General Secretary on Twitter/X.

UNISON former President Andrea Egan launches her campaign to be the union’s next General Secretary


December 9, 2024

Andrea Egan, President of UNISON in 2022/23, has announced her candidacy as General Secretary in forthcoming elections to the union. UNISON is Britain’s largest trade union with 1.3 million members and an income of almost £200 million. Andrea’s campaign is being supported by Time for Real Change, rank and file UNISON activists organising for a more democratic, transparent and successful union.

Andrea started work in the 1980s as a children’s care worker before later qualifying as a social worker. She was instrumental in leading UNISON’s first strike action against the academisation of schools back in 2008. During her time as President, she supported members to commence implementation of the Race Discrimination Panel. Andrea has played a leading role in the Organising to Win strategy to improve pay and conditions for the union’s members.

If elected, Andrea has pledged to take the wage of a social worker and channel the rest of the £166,000 General Secretary pay package into funding welfare and industrial action funds. She has committed to conducting a review into the union machinery, championing its diverse membership and standing up for oppressed people around the globe.

Andrea Egan says: “I’m standing to be General Secretary to give power to ordinary members, implement the decisions they’ve voted for, end bureaucratic waste and start winning the real improvements to pay and conditions all members deserve. I’ll take the wage of a social worker and conduct a comprehensive review of how the union operates. It’s time for UNISON to change – it’s time to win.”

David Jones, UNISON NEC member, adds: “We at Time For Real Change are delighted to support Andrea’s campaign for General Secretary. For far too long, UNISON’s bureaucracy has been slow to act on democratic decisions made by members. This has got to change, and it can under new leadership.”

 If you support Andrea’s vision for UNISON, show your support by visiting Andrea’s website today. https://andrea4gs.org.uk/ and spread the word on social media:  FB: https://www.facebook.com/Andrea4GS/. Insta:. https://www.instagram.com/andrea4gs/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet.  Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/andrea4gs.bsky.social. X: https://x.com/Andrea4GS


UK

“Still somewhat shackled”


 

The Government’s new legislation does not allow unions to generate as much leverage over employers as they need, explains Gregor Gall.

Based on last year’s figures, by January 4th next year at around one o’clock in the afternoon, the average earnings of chief executives of the top 100 companies will have surpassed the average salary for a whole year for a full-time worker in Britain. The value of what chief executives bring to the table is not one hundred and twenty times more the worth of what the average paid worker brings to the table. This is just one of the most startling instances of the continuing economic inequality in Britain.  

Even though the Labour Government’s employment law reforms, embodied in the Employment Rights Bill 2024, were born out of ‘Labour’s Plan to Make Work Pay’ (previously entitled ‘A New Deal for Working People’), it is clear these proposed reforms will not make work pay for most workers.

The Employment Rights Bill 2024 sets out reforms to union recognition, collective bargaining and industrial action. But the problem is that the Bill does not provide a right for unions to have access to workers for recruiting and organising. It simply gives them the right to ask a government body for this access but that government body has no powers of enforcement.

This then undermines the significant improvements being made to the right to union recognition (and thus also collective bargaining on pay) through lowering the levels of worker support needed to gain it from an employer. And in only one instance is Labour proposing to set up the machinery for a sector-wide ‘Fair Pay Agreement’, namely, the adult social care sector. Lastly, while some of the most onerous obligations on unions when undertaking industrial action have been removed, many remain so that unions are still somewhat shackled. The result is unions are not able to generate as much leverage over employers as they need.

Let’s look at some of the detail of this. There will be a mechanism for facilitating union access where certain criteria are met. A union will be able to ask an employer to enter into an access agreement, and that if the employer refuses, the union will be able to then apply to the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC), which can effectively impose an access arrangement. As with the process for gaining union recognition, the application for access will not be a quick or easy one. Indeed, the process will essentially mirror that of the (as yet unamended) process for applying for union recognition. 

But just as tellingly, if an employer fails to observe an access agreement or a CAC-imposed arrangement, there is no means for compelling the employer to comply. A union can make another reference to the CAC to have a financial penalty imposed upon the recalcitrant employer, but this is payable to the Government and not the union.

This means that the to-be-welcomed reforms of the statutory union recognition procedure are gravely undermined by putting obstacles in the way of taking advantage of the reforms. In other words, employers will still be able to freely practice anti-unionism in order to stop unions meeting the reduced thresholds for union recognition. Union recognition is essential for carrying out collective bargaining on pay and other terms and conditions. We know from the 1970s that it is the coverage of collective bargaining on wages – around 80% – that made that decade the most equal in economic terms by social class that Britain had ever been.

These reforms include deleting the current requirements for unions to (i) have the support of at least 40% of all those entitled to vote in the proposed bargaining unit in a recognition ballot and its replacing by the requirement of a simple majority of those voting to win the ballot, and (ii) to demonstrate in an application to the CAC that it is likely to win a recognition ballot (by worker support via a petition or by membership density) and replacing this with the requirement that the union only need to show a minimum of 10% membership in the proposed bargaining unit for the application for recognition to be accepted and progressed to the next stage of adjudication.

This is typical of Labour – essentially giving with one hand and taking away with the other or representing two steps forward and one step back.

Gregor Gall is a visiting professor of industrial relations at the University of Leeds and author of the ‘Mick Lynch: The making of a working-class hero’ (Manchester University Press, 2024), reviewed here on Labour Hub.

Gregor Gall will be spealing alongside Maria Exall on Thursday 12 December, at 6pm at an online briefing for trade union activists: Employment Rights Bill: what’s the latest, what should we be fighting for? Register to attend here.

Online briefing for trade union activists: Employment Rights Bill: what’s the latest, what should we be fighting for?

SPEAKERS: Gregor Gall and Maria Exall

Thursday 12 December, 6pm


UK Trade unions call on government to act on manifesto promise to strengthen statutory sick pay

9 December, 2024 
Left Foot Forward


Union leaders stress that statutory sick pay in the UK is 'set at one of the lowest levels in the industrialised world'



Trade union general secretaries have voiced concerns about the government’s “inaction” on statutory sick pay.

Bosses from 24 trade unions have written to the prime minister saying that the current rate of statutory sick pay (SSP), which is set at one of the lowest levels in the industrialised world, is currently too low for many workers to safely recover from illness.

Addressing the Trades Union Congress in Liverpool last year, Angela Rayner said that a Labour government would increase statutory sick pay, but she didn’t specify by how much.

In its election manifesto, Labour pledged to “strengthen statutory sick pay, remove the lower earnings limit to make it available to all workers and remove the waiting period”.

The new Employment Rights Bill includes proposals to remove the lower earnings limit to make it available to all workers and start SSP payments from the first day they are off sick.

The letter added: “But where is the Government’s plan to strengthen Statutory Sick Pay? Even with the changes to Statutory Sick Pay proposed in the Bill, a full-time employee will only receive £3 an hour when they are off sick – one of the lowest replacement rates in the OECD.

“We believe an increase in the rate of Statutory Sick Pay is needed so that workers can meet the cost of living in their time of need.”

In April 2025, the weekly SSP rate will rise by £2 a week to £118.75, leaving a full time worker on £3 an hour if they take time off from work due to illness.

The group of trade unions said that this either forces people to work when they are ill or leaves them struggling to make ends meet if they take time off.

The letter said: “We’ve heard of workers delaying their cancer treatment because on £116 a week they don’t know how they’ll be able to put food on the table.

“We’ve heard of workers struggling into work with a broken leg as they couldn’t afford the bills.

“And we’ve heard of workers taking time off and getting into debt, having to leave the workforce or falling into destitution.”

The group of trade unions said it would like to meet with ministers to further discuss the issue.

The trade unions that signed the letter were:

Professor Philip Banfield, Council Chair, British Medical Association
Professor Nicola Ranger, General Secretary & Chief Executive, Royal College of Nursing
Dave Ward, General Secretary, CWU
Maryam Eslamdoust, General Secretary, TSSA
Dr Patrick Roach, General Secretary, NASUWT
Daniel Kebede, General Secretary, National Education Union
Paul Fleming, General Secretary, Equity
Dr Jo Grady, General Secretary, UCU
Mick Lynch, General Secretary, RMT
Sarah Woolley, General Secretary, BFAWU
Michelle Stanistreet, General Secretary, NUJ
Brian Linn, General Secretary, AEGIS
Fran Heathcote, General Secretary, PCS
Emma Clay, General Secretary, Nationwide Group Staff Union
Zita Holbourne, Co-Chair, Artists Union England
Oshor Williams, Assistant Director of Education, Professional Footballers Association
Ian Lawrence, General Secretary, NAPO
Steve Gillan, General Secretary, POA
Bob Monks, General Secretary, United Road Transport Union
John McGowan, General Secretary, Social Workers Union
Julia Georgio, General Secretary, NHBC Staff Association
Gawain Little, General Secretary, General Federation of Trade Unions
Lord John Hendy, Chair, Institute of Employment Rights
Michael Schwaabe, London President, Association of Flight Attendants, CWA

Olivia Barber is a reporter at Left Foot Forward
UK
NHS and school workers slam Labour’s ‘disgusting’ 2.8 percent pay offer

Unions have to give a lead after the Labour government announced a pay insult for millions of public sector workers in health and education


NHS workers march on Downing Street, London in July 2022 to demand a pay rise.
 (Guy Smallman)


Wednesday 11 December 2024 
SOCIALIST WORKER Issue 2935


Health workers and teachers are angry at the Labour government’s latest insult to workers.

Ministers have recommended a pay increase of 2.8 percent next year for NHS workers and teachers. It’s barely above the predicted average rate of inflation of 2.6 percent—and that’s the lower CPI measure that doesn’t include housing costs.

On top of this, Labour said government departments would have to fund 2025-26 and future pay increases from their own budgets. That means ministers making cuts in health and education budgets.

Jordan is a health worker in east London and a leading activist in the Unison union. She told Socialist Worker that the 2.8 percent pay ceiling is “disgusting” and that NHS workers are already struggling to make ends meet.

“In the past, people used to do an overtime shift and put the money into their holiday savings,” she said. “Now overtime only helps you get through the month. We’re all working extra hours to survive.”

And Jordan says that means health unions need to step up their fight. “The government gave us a 5.5 percent settlement earlier this year,” she said. “Unison rightly said that we will need years of above-inflation rises to make up for pay erosion over many years.

“We lost between 15 and 20 percent of the value of our pay during the Tory governments—that’s money that we should now be clawing back.”


Labour preps privatisation war on public services

In an email to members, Unison’s head of health, Helga Pile, acknowledged that pay offers based on the government’s 2.8 percent figure are “barely above inflation”. But it appeared she was keen to stress that “this isn’t the final outcome”.

Jordan thinks the only way to get a bigger increase is to fight for one. “Unison’s senior officials seem to think that Labour will only reward us if we don’t rock the boat. I think the opposite is true,” she said.

“The nurses’ RCN union has rightly rejected the 2.8 percent pay envelope as an insult. Unison is far less critical of Labour. But I want to hear fighting talk from my union now, and I want it to show members a lead.

“That means we should talk about linking up with all the other health unions and fighting together for a better deal.”

Trade unions have to start organising to win a fully-funded, inflation-busting pay rise.

UK Trade unions say proposed pay increase is an ‘insult’ to millions of public sector workers

Olivia Barber 
Today
Left Foot Forward


Unison, the BMA, Unite and the NEU have all said a 2.8% pay rise next year isn’t enough



Trade unions have criticised the government’s proposals to increase public sector workers’ pay by 2.8% next year, warning that it will go down badly with staff and fail to tackle the recruitment crisis in public services.

Government departments have recommended a 2.8% pay rise for public sector workers, including teachers, NHS workers, and civil servants in 2025/26, which is only slightly above the Office for Budget Responsibility’s inflation forecast of 2.6% for that period.

In its evidence to public sector pay review bodies, the Treasury said that budgets for 2025/26 have now been fixed, and that “unlike in recent years, departments will not be given additional funding for pay awards”.

Unison has said that the government’s recommended pay increase will “go down badly with staff” and warned that ongoing problems with NHS pay scales could lead to more strikes.

Head of health at Unison, Helga Pile, said: “Staff are crucial in turning around the fortunes of the NHS.

“Improving performance is a key government pledge, but the pay rise proposed is barely above the cost of living.”

Pile added that the Agenda for Change pay scale, which has been in place since 2004, is “outdated” and has led to “lots of local strikes”.

“The decision to push tackling the outdated pay structure back into next year means there could well be more [strikes],” she said.

Unite’s general secretary, Sharon Graham, said that “this latest below inflation pay recommendation is an insult to dedicated NHS staff and further evidence that the pay review body is broken beyond repair.”

Graham said that Unite has consistently argued that NHS pay concerns must be resolved directly through negotiations with the government, rather than through pay review bodies.

The National Education Union’s general secretary, Daniel Kebede, said the proposed pay deal “won’t do”.

Kebede said that a 2.8% increase is likely to be below inflation and behind wage increases in the wider economy, which he argued will deepen the crisis in the education sector.

He said that “teacher pay has been cut by over a fifth in real terms since 2010, hitting teacher living standards and damaging the competitive position of teaching against other graduate professions”.

Kebede said that “instead of continuing with failed Conservative austerity”, the government needs to fully fund pay increases that are needed to recruit and retain teachers.

He added: “We are putting the Government on notice. Our members care deeply about education and feel the depth of the crisis. This won’t do.”

Olivia Barber is a reporter at Left Foot Forward



Public sector pay offer: TUC warns of ‘real concern across trade union movement’


© Jess Hurd

Union leaders have hit out at proposals to raise pay by 2.8% for millions of public sector workers, with the TUC’s general secretary urging the government to bring in “meaningful pay rises”.

Some of the proposed pay rises set out on Tuesday would increase the salaries of many teachers, NHS workers and senior civil servants – but many have been quick to note the proposed rate is only marginally higher than projected inflation.

The Office for Budget Responsibility predicts inflation will average 2.5% this year and 2.6% next year.

TUC General SecretaryPaul Nowak said: “There are real concerns across the trade union movement about the government’s recommendation.

“We all know the pressure on public finances from the mess the Tories left things in. But as the government’s evidence acknowledges, the recruitment and retention crisis in our public sector has been driven in part by pay. And it has caused a deterioration in our schools, hospitals, local councils and other services families depend on.

“It’s hard to see how you address the crisis in our services without meaningful pay rises. And it’s hard to see how services cut to the bone by 14 years of Tory government will find significant cash savings.”

The Chancellor has repeatedly insisted that difficult measures will be needed to keep public finances under control.

A Downing Street spokesperson said the government had launched a “reset” in its relations with trade unions, and was working “collaboratively” with them.

But he said the “black hole” inherited meant tough decisions, suggesting pay rises would have to be met from departmental spending budgets and productivity gains.

UNISON head of health Helga Pile said: “The government has inherited a financial mess from its predecessors, but this is not what NHS workers wanted to hear.

“Staff are crucial in turning around the fortunes of the NHS. Improving performance is a key government pledge, but the pay rise proposed is barely above the cost of living.”

Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: “This latest below inflation pay recommendation is an insult to dedicated NHS staff and further evidence that the pay review body is broken beyond repair.”

Notably one other Labour-affiliated union, GMB, has so far avoided commenting publicly on the proposals.

Did Christian Nationalism Win? Matthew Taylor on the Vote and the Future

Host Rev. Paul Brandeis Raushenbush talks with religion scholar Dr. Matthew D. Taylor about the role Christian Nationalism played in the election outcome - and how it will show up going forward. Also, Director Stephen Ujlaki and Executive Producer Todd Stiefel on their documentary "Bad Faith: Christian Nationalism's Unholy War on Democracy"




Christian Nationalism has seemingly grabbed the levers of power in America. With an overt passion for power over democracy, the agenda of this authoritarian, exclusionary movement needs to be examined now, more than ever. This week on The State of Belief, host Rev. Paul Brandeis Raushenbush turns to concerned experts who have been telling this story and sounding the alarm in book and documentary form.

We get Matthew Taylor’s take, with a focus on the nomination of Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense, and his Crusades-evoking tattoos. Matt’s also got a lot to say about the role Christian Nationalism played in getting out the vote in the 2024 election – and ways it’s sure to be a driving force in the incoming administration. None of it is a surprise for Matt, who’s the author of the important book The Violent Take It By Force: The Christian Movement That Is Threatening Our Democracy.

Matthew D. Taylor, Ph.D., is a senior scholar at the Institute for Islamic Jewish Christian Studies, specializing in Muslim-Christian dialogue, Evangelical and Pentecostal movements, religious politics in the U.S., and American Islam.

Paul also gets the insights of two of the creators of Bad Faith: Christian Nationalism’s Unholy War on Democracy – Executive Producer Todd Stiefel and Director Stephen Ujlaki. Featuring a who’s-who of knowledgeable voices, many of which you’ve heard on The State of Belief, the film traces the history of corrosive theocratic movements like Christian Nationalism back to the Moral Majority and Council for National Policy, and sounds a credible alarm about what the end game may well be.

Stephen Ujlaki is a professor of screenwriting at Loyola Marymount University and a member of the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences (AMPAS). He has produced over 30 feature films and documentaries, and wrote, directed, and produced his most recent project, Bad Faith.

Todd Stiefel is the founder and president of the Stiefel Freethought Foundation and Heretical Reason Productions, and chairs the ScienceSaves campaign. An investor, activist, and philanthropist, Todd is the executive producer of the film Bad Faith.

Meditation can reduce stress – but the pressure to overwork remains

(The Conversation) — Mindfulness – meant to support health and detachment – is becoming a tool to support the corporate bottom line.


Jaime L Kucinskas
December 10, 2024

(The Conversation) — Overwork and burnout are affecting many Americans.

The American Psychological Association’s 2023 Work and Well-being Survey found that 77% of Americans suffered from workplace stress. Over half of the respondents reported symptoms of burnout, which ranged from emotional exhaustion to wanting to quit.

Many Americans feel under constant pressure to get ahead and are not able to take a break. Employees report that their workplaces do not encourage mental health or work-life balance.

As a result, an increasing number of Americans have turned to meditation. Some use it to take a break at work, others to refocus, or more generally to promote better mental health.

In my book “The Mindful Elite,” I tracked the growth of the mindfulness movement from 1979 until 2015. I spoke with over 100 meditators who run 61 mindful programs and organizations that bring mindfulness to secular workplaces and schools across the country.

Many of them told me how meditation helped them approach their work and lives with more patience, empathy and self-reflection. Meditation, they said, helped alleviate stress and increased their attention and self-awareness. Other studies also affirm mindfulness can help people cope with anxiety, depression and pain. However, it remains worth asking: Are there limits – or even downsides – to bringing meditation to work?
Mindfulness as a panacea

Early mindfulness leaders were remarkably successful in spreading meditation across America. Jon Kabat-Zinn, a molecular biologist, began his mindfulness-based stress reduction program at the University of Massachusetts Medical School in 1979 to provide a complementary and alternative model of care for the chronically ill.

He hoped to share the “essence of Buddhist mindfulness,” as he has written, within “mainstream medicine.” Over 25,000 people have completed his mindfulness-based stress reduction program, and it continues to be taught around the world.

By 2022, meditation had become the most prevalent relaxation practice in the United States, with 18% of Americans adopting it. Many people use meditation to address a health issue, or turn to it in the absence of access to conventional medical care.

Meditation has become popular in offices and schools across North America and Europe. To fit into workweeks of busy professionals, meditation teachers often offer shorter entry-level practice sessions tailored to host organizations’ goals and busy schedules. Some schools even offer short 15-minute lessons.

Meditation instructors secularize and justify mindfulness as aiding health and performance in a cost-effective manner that serves the bottom line.

They also adapt it to make it appeal to those they work with. A trainer for law enforcement and the military explained: “It’s very mission-oriented in terms of my experiences in combat. … We basically designed a curriculum that would speak to these kinds of folks.” In his program, he did not talk about meditation or do “anything that they would consider weird or unusual.” He said he did not even use the word mindfulness.

These approaches have led to some critiques that the primarily white and Western teachers are wrongfully appropriating the practices to support aims antithetical to Buddhist tenets of nonviolence or nonattachment to worldly outcomes.
Coping mechanism or transformational practice?

Leaders of the early mindfulness movement said they wanted to transform society for the greater good through the practice. Their goal was to spread meditation practices across science, health care, prisons, schools and other institutions.

Kabat-Zinn wanted to foster greater “awareness” through mindfulness so people would become more conscious of what motivated their actions. For example, it could help them understand if they were driven by their own sense of self-aggrandizement or greed and inspire them to change.

Saki Santorelli, the former leader of the Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction Program, similarly hoped that embedding mindfulness in secular institutions would force practitioners to understand the essential reality of interconnectedness. This reality draws on a Buddhist belief that all life is interdependent and connected with each other, rather than existing independently on its own. Through mind-heart training, he hoped they would realize their universal responsibility to others and help create more inclusive economic systems.

Meditation to support corporate ends

Yet in most of the organizations I studied, contemplative practice did not reach the organizational core and transform the larger workplaces they were a part of. Instead, employees reported that mindfulness was seen as marginal to core missions and workplace expectations.


People practicing mindfulness at a retreat.
Thomas Yau/South China Morning Post via Getty Images

Companies might offer recreational yoga in their fitness room for employees, but it was often not being used to address the underlying cause of stress, such as extremely high workloads and the emphasis on the economic bottom line at the core of corporate culture.


Even though some programs may benefit highly stressed-out workers, they struggle to bring lessons learned from meditation into competitive work cultures beyond their meditation groups.

Mindfulness teacher and scholar Cathy-Mae Karelse questions whether because mindfulness programs so closely mimic typical business and educational structures, they have lost the “emancipatory potential” some founders hoped for.

In her book “Work, Pray, Code,” Carolyn Chen shows how some Silicon Valley tech firms have adapted spiritual practices to such an extent that they have come to be used to support corporate ends, rather than individual liberation.

For example, one company even put their logo in the center of their labyrinth. Walking the circular maze of a labyrinth to end up in a place that emphasizes corporate loyalty seems to co-opt the liberational purpose of doing the practice. This is a far cry from many spiritual practitioners’ goals of using the practice as a transcendent metaphorical journey to a place of deeper personal insight.

I fear mindfulness is all too often becoming a Band-Aid that helps sustain overburdened employees on an endless quest for more productivity.


(Jaime L Kucinskas, Associate Professor of Sociology, Hamilton College. The views expressed in this commentary do not necessarily reflect those of Religion News Service.)
JESUS WAS PALESTINIAN

From DC to the Vatican, baby Jesus is wearing a keffiyeh

(RNS) — The pro-Palestinian creche is intended to point out the disconnect between the idealized Bethlehem of most representations and the reality in present-day Gaza and the West Bank.


St. Mark’s Episcopal Church in Washington’s Capitol Hill neighborhood is one of several churches across the country that have created crèches called “Christ in the Rubble.” The name comes from a book by Palestinian Christian pastor Munther Isaac. Featuring the baby Jesus wrapped in a black-and-white checkered keffiyeh, the creche is intended to remind Christians that if Jesus were born today, he would be born under the rubble. (Photo courtesy Lindsey Jones-Renaud)

Yonat Shimron
December 9, 2024

(RNS) — The scene representing the birth of Jesus is a common December sight, artfully arranged on church lawns or entryways across the country.

But in some churches this year, the nativity crèche is looking a bit different.

The manger has been replaced with a pile of rocks, and the baby Jesus is swaddled not with a thin blanket but with a black-and-white keffiyeh, the Middle Eastern-style scarf that has become a symbol of Palestinians’ resistance to Israeli aggression.

This tableau, often called Christ in the Rubble, first appeared last year in the town of Bethlehem outside the Evangelical Lutheran Christmas Church, pastored by the prominent Palestinian minister and activist Munther Issac. All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena, California, quickly copied it and constructed one on its lawn.

This Advent season, leading to Christmas, they are becoming more common. Even Pope Francis was presented a crèche Saturday (Dec. 7) by two Bethlehem-based artists, featuring a baby Jesus nestled in a keffiyeh.

The pontiff declared “Enough wars, enough violence!” while receiving the delegation of Palestinian groups that organized the project.


Pope Francis prays in front of a nativity scene crafted in the West Bank city of Bethlehem, as he arrives for a meeting with the donors of the fir tree set up in St. Peter’s Square as a Christmas tree and those who have crafted the life-size nativity scene at the base of the tree, in the Paul VI Hall at the Vatican, Saturday, Dec. 7, 2024.
(AP Photo/Andrew Medichini)

In Washington, D.C., less than half a mile from the U.S. Capitol, another church assembled a Christ in the Rubble crèche last week.

The nativity scene outside St. Mark’s Episcopal Church features a Black baby Jesus swaddled in a keffiyeh lying in a bed of broken bricks and clumps of concrete and wire.

It is intended to bring awareness to Israel’s ongoing war that has leveled the Gaza Strip and killed more than 44,000 Palestinians, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, as well as to the plight of Palestinians in Bethlehem, located in the occupied West Bank. While most Palestinians are Muslim, there is a thriving Palestinian Christian community in Bethlehem, the site of Jesus’ birth, according to the gospels of Matthew and Luke.

“At Christmas, we sing about Bethlehem and we put up our manger scenes and talk about this story of Jesus being born in this town of Bethlehem with its themes of peace, love, joy and hope,” said Lindsey Jones-Renaud, a lay member of St. Mark’s who was part of the team that assembled the crèche last week. “But there’s such a disconnect between all that and what is actually happening in Bethlehem right now and in the surrounding lands.”

Since the Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on West Bank Palestinians have skyrocketed. Israeli settlers have vandalized Palestinian property and burned homes and cars, often as Israeli security forces stand by. About 900 West Bank Palestinians have been killed in 1,400 attacks, according to the United Nations. More than 50 West Bank Palestinian communities have been forced to abandon their homes.


Steven Scammacca, left, and Lindsey Jones-Renaud, members of St. Mark’s Episcopal Church, pose with the church’s “Christ in the Rubble” crèche in Washington’s Capitol Hill neighborhood. (Photo courtesy Lindsey Jones-Renaud)

On Sunday, Jones-Renaud flew to Israel on a 10-day delegation that will tour the West Bank in a show of solidarity with the Palestinian villagers — and, if necessary, to act as a buffer to protect them from the escalated attacks by Israeli settlers and the Israeli army. It is the fourth trip planned by the group Christians for Ceasefire.

Multiple U.S. Christian organizations have protested Israel’s harsh military rule on Palestinians. They have called for a cease-fire and an end to U.S. military aid to Israel. The U.S. has supplied more than $22 billion in military aid to Israel since the war in Gaza began, according to a Brown University study.

Now, during the season of Advent, these organizations are working on campaigns to bring greater awareness to the plight of Palestinians.

“We need to take more risks to stop the killing in the spirit of Christmas and the birth of the Prince of Peace,” said Eli McCarthy, a professor of theology at Georgetown University and a Just Peace Fellow with the Franciscan Action Network. (Jesus is often referred to as the Prince of Peace.)

Friends of Sabeel North America, an interdenominational Christian organization working on Palestinian justice, is encouraging a Preach Palestine Day of Action in conjunction with International Human Rights Day, which falls on Tuesday.

FOSNA’s Michigan chapter is planning to install two moveable “Christ in the Rubble” crèches this month, one at a park and another at a market — both in Detroit.

“Symbols matter and visuals matter, and our understanding in all of our traditions, Judaism, Islam and Christianity, is that God is always on the side of the oppressed,” said Kim Redigan, a member of the FOSNA Michigan group and a Catholic. “God is on the side of those who are suffering. God is on the side of those who are being crushed.”

Some churches will also be participating in a Mennonite Action event on Dec. 21 called the “Longest Night for Gaza Service” to grieve the loss of Palestinian lives. And on Dec. 28, the Feast of the Holy Innocents, some churches will take public actions on the day Christians commemorate the Gospel story of the massacre of male children in Bethlehem by King Herod.

“Scripture reminds us to seek justice, show mercy and protect innocent life,” said Steven Scammacca, a member of St. Mark’s Episcopal Church who worked on the Christ in the Rubble crèche alongside Jones-Renaud. “Those values are clearly violated by the violence in Gaza.”